Search
document

Document text Analytics

KAHIL v. GREECE

Doc ref: 21784/93 • ECHR ID: 001-2043

Document date: February 28, 1995

Inbound citations: 0
•
Cited paragraphs: 0
•
Outbound citations: 0

KAHIL v. GREECE

Doc ref: 21784/93 • ECHR ID: 001-2043

Document date: February 28, 1995

Cited paragraphs only

AS TO THE ADMISSIBILITY OF

Application No. 21784/93

by Hassib KAHIL

against Greece

The European Commission of Human Rights (First Chamber) sitting

in private on 28 February 1995, the following members being present:

Mrs. J. LIDDY, Acting President

MM. C.L. ROZAKIS

A.S. GÖZÜBÜYÜK

A. WEITZEL

M.P. PELLONPÄÄ

B. CONFORTI

N. BRATZA

I. BÉKÉS

E. KONSTANTINOV

G. RESS

Mrs. M.F. BUQUICCHIO, Secretary to the Chamber

Having regard to Article 25 of the Convention for the Protection

of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms;

Having regard to the application introduced on 10 February 1993

by Hassib KAHIL against Greece and registered on 30 April 1993 under

file No. 21784/93;

Having regard to the report provided for in Rule 47 of the Rules

of Procedure of the Commission;

Having deliberated;

Decides as follows:

THE FACTS

The applicant is a Lebanese citizen born in 1961 in Lebanon.

The facts of the case, as they have been submitted by the

applicant, may be summarised as follows:

On 5 May 1989 the applicant was arrested in Athens in connection

with drug offences. He claims that he was beaten by the police officers

who arrested him.

The applicant was detained on remand until 11 May 1990, when he

was found guilty of selling drugs and sentenced to life imprisonment

by the three-member Court of Appeal (trimeles efeteio) of Athens, the

court having found that he was not a drug addict.

On 9 July 1990 the applicant requested that he be allowed to

continue to serve his sentence in the Koridallos prison to be able to

visit his wife who was also detained there. On 27 September 1990 he was

transferred to the prison of Patras.

On 28 January 1991 the applicant was diagnosed as suffering from

haemorrhoids and gastritis and an operation was recommended.

On 5 March and 1 April 1991 the applicant applied to be

transferred to the prison of Koridallos to enable him to prepare his

appeal, due to be heard on 22 May 1991, and to be near his wife who was

detained in the same prison. He was eventually transferred to the

Koridallos prison five days before the appeal hearing.

On 22 May 1991 the hearing was adjourned. On 11 November 1991 the

applicant asked for permission to visit his wife. Before receiving a

reply, he was transferred back to Patras.

On 9 March 1992 the applicant was interrogated by the Director

of the prison of Patras in connection with a window which had been

found broken. He claims that he was beaten by prison officers in the

course of the interrogation. The applicant was placed in isolation for

ten days and was charged with attempting to escape.

Between 5 and 13 July 1992 the applicant was hospitalised in the

General Hospital of Patras.

On 18 November 1992 the applicant's sentence was reduced to 8

years imprisonment by the five-member Court of Appeal (pentameles

efeteio) of Athens. Considering the applicant to be a drug addict, the

court ordered that he be transferred to a disintoxication centre.

The applicant appealed in cassation. The hearing of his appeal

was fixed for 27 April 1993.

On 3 May 1993 the three-member first instance criminal court

(trimeles plimeleiodikeio) of Patras rejected the applicant's

application to be transferred to a disintoxication centre.

On 29 June 1993 the applicant was due to appear before a first

instance criminal court in Patras to be tried for attempting to escape.

COMPLAINTS

1. The applicant complains of the fairness of the criminal

proceedings against him, of his conviction, and of the fact that he is

detained in an ordinary prison, notwithstanding the decision of the

second instance court ordering his detention in a disintoxication

centre. He invokes in this connection Article 5, 6 and 7 of the

Convention.

2. He further complains that he does not receive the required

medical treatment, that he has been ill-treated on two occasions by

police and prison officers, that he is not allowed to visit his wife

and that he was placed in solitary confinement despite his health

condition. He invokes in this connection Articles 2, 3, 4 and 8 of the

Convention.

REASONS FOR THE DECISION

The Commission notes that by letter of 20 October 1993, addressed

to the prison of Patras where he was being detained, the applicant was

requested to provide additional information to the Commission

concerning the issue of exhaustion of domestic remedies and to furnish

copies of certain court decisions. The applicant has failed to reply,

despite reminders sent to him on 11 July 1994, 14 October 1994 and

16 December 1994.

The Commission concludes under Article 30 para. 1 (a) of the

Convention that the applicant no longer intends to pursue his petition.

It further considers that respect for Human Rights as defined in the

Convention does not require it to continue the examination of the

application.

For these reasons, the Commission, unanimously

DECIDES TO STRIKE THE APPLICATION OUT OF THE LIST OF CASES.

Secretary Acting President

to the First Chamber of the First Chamber

(M.F. BUQUICCHIO) (J. LIDDY)

LEXI

Lexploria AI Legal Assistant